Timeline for In a Group as a category C with one object, How is the bifunctor ⊗ : C × C → C defined on morphisms?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 15, 2019 at 12:46 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | Yes, if you instead take the objects to be group elements, and the underlying category to be discrete. David's comment is closely related to the Eckmann-Hilton argument: ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Eckmann-Hilton+argument | |
| Sep 15, 2019 at 11:17 | comment | added | user145873 | Can a non-abelian group be a monoidal category? | |
| Sep 15, 2019 at 10:57 | comment | added | David Roberts♦ | Why do you expect there to be such a bifunctor? If there is a bifunctor as you write, the group is forced to be abelian. | |
| Sep 15, 2019 at 10:20 | review | First posts | |||
| Sep 15, 2019 at 10:32 | |||||
| Sep 15, 2019 at 10:17 | history | asked | user145873 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |